3 ms·

I love the idea, but competence isn't the right word here. Competence doesn't have an intrinsic ethical dimension. It's not unethical to sincerely try and fail

I love the idea, but competence isn't the right word here. Competence doesn't have an intrinsic ethical dimension. It's not unethical to sincerely try and fail, while the author does ascribe a pretty clear ethical dimension to moral incompetence. I think humility is the better idea here. The examples of moral incompetence all center around egoism. Moral competence seems to follow from removing oneself and focusing on outcomes over personal validation. It's a call for helpers to serve and be humble. I've had this thought before many times. Having gone down this path a bit, I would caution the author: deciding "I'm going to solve a big problem" is at once incredibly important (to get to the solution) and deeply arrogant (what, _you're_ gonna solve poverty?). Don't let the necessity for arrogance get in the way of your willingness to do good.

scrozier 6y ago
I think you're on to something, but "humility" doesn't seem to quite get at it. Maybe "focus"? It seems that the author is saying that to be moral and morally effective, one needs to be ends-focused, as opposed to means-focused. IOW, if a morally focused person hears of a way to provide the same results that they are, at half the cost, they should rush to implement that method, or join that effort. A means-focused person might tend to recruit more people or money to their cause, seeing the better method as competition.
- flaque 6y ago
  Focus is exactly the word and tone I was looking for.
dgb23 6y ago
> Don't let the necessity for arrogance get in the way of your willingness to do good. I like this! Though there are other ways to describe the state of mind necessary. For example "crazy" and "naive" are used this way often. Typically, to advance in drastic ways, one has to break out of the mold, think outside of the box, dream big... Essentially act abnormal in some way. Most of these attempts fail, the few that succeed are worth it all, because without outliers things can't change and ultimately progress.
imgabe 6y ago
> It's not unethical to sincerely try and fail, while the author does ascribe a pretty clear ethical dimension to moral incompetence. It doesn't matter if it's ethical or not if it doesn't work.
elihu 6y ago
There's another aspect of it that the author doesn't address, which is that for a lot of people working on these problems, they're also looking for a way to pay their bills. > The signature move of the morally incompetent is to be told about existing solutions that they were previously unaware of and then soldier on without any critical examination of any added value they're providing. Others working on the problem are ignored entirely or seen as a threat to their own solution. If a person isn't already rich, then they're often balancing doing good for others with making at least enough money that they don't have to work a side job. In that sense, others working on the same problem absolutely are a threat to one's livelihood. Being aware that helping others can sometimes be in conflict with helping oneself and figuring out how to resolve those conflicts in a way that doesn't reduce one's effectiveness in helping others is important, but it seems to me that not working to help other people who have different approaches to the problem might not necessarily be an ethical failure but rather an economic one. Working with someone else and doing it their way might not be an option if there isn't a viable route to funding ones' own work. On the other hand, I do agree that humility is valuable. If you're in it mostly to feel good about yourself rather than to do the most good even if it isn't personally rewarding, then the end results might not be as good as they would be otherwise. But then I'd rather have more people trying to help others even for bad reasons than not trying at all.
drak0n1c 6y ago
Competence does have a moral dimension as far as the relevance of ethics, specifically the importance of work ethic and a modicum of self-awareness. There is a point where repeat negligence and the opportunity cost of its resource drain becomes a moral failure.

scrozier 6y ago

I think you're on to something, but "humility" doesn't seem to quite get at it. Maybe "focus"? It seems that the author is saying that to be moral and morally effective, one needs to be ends-focused, as opposed to means-focused. IOW, if a morally focused person hears of a way to provide the same results that they are, at half the cost, they should rush to implement that method, or join that effort. A means-focused person might tend to recruit more people or money to their cause, seeing the better method as competition.

flaque 6y ago
Focus is exactly the word and tone I was looking for.

dgb23 6y ago

> Don't let the necessity for arrogance get in the way of your willingness to do good. I like this! Though there are other ways to describe the state of mind necessary. For example "crazy" and "naive" are used this way often. Typically, to advance in drastic ways, one has to break out of the mold, think outside of the box, dream big... Essentially act abnormal in some way. Most of these attempts fail, the few that succeed are worth it all, because without outliers things can't change and ultimately progress.

imgabe 6y ago

> It's not unethical to sincerely try and fail, while the author does ascribe a pretty clear ethical dimension to moral incompetence. It doesn't matter if it's ethical or not if it doesn't work.

elihu 6y ago

There's another aspect of it that the author doesn't address, which is that for a lot of people working on these problems, they're also looking for a way to pay their bills. > The signature move of the morally incompetent is to be told about existing solutions that they were previously unaware of and then soldier on without any critical examination of any added value they're providing. Others working on the problem are ignored entirely or seen as a threat to their own solution. If a person isn't already rich, then they're often balancing doing good for others with making at least enough money that they don't have to work a side job. In that sense, others working on the same problem absolutely are a threat to one's livelihood. Being aware that helping others can sometimes be in conflict with helping oneself and figuring out how to resolve those conflicts in a way that doesn't reduce one's effectiveness in helping others is important, but it seems to me that not working to help other people who have different approaches to the problem might not necessarily be an ethical failure but rather an economic one. Working with someone else and doing it their way might not be an option if there isn't a viable route to funding ones' own work. On the other hand, I do agree that humility is valuable. If you're in it mostly to feel good about yourself rather than to do the most good even if it isn't personally rewarding, then the end results might not be as good as they would be otherwise. But then I'd rather have more people trying to help others even for bad reasons than not trying at all.

drak0n1c 6y ago

Competence does have a moral dimension as far as the relevance of ethics, specifically the importance of work ethic and a modicum of self-awareness. There is a point where repeat negligence and the opportunity cost of its resource drain becomes a moral failure.